Some note-worthy observations and comparisons in no particular order:
– Sikh leaders have come out to condemn the behaviour of the offender and his family and to show their support for the victim. This contrasts noticeably with Muslim leaders after a Muslim atrocity, where the emphasis is on disowning the perpetrator and pretending he wasn’t really one of them
– The murder does not appear to religiously inspired. This was a murder by someone who happens to be Sikh. There is no suggestion that he thought his actions were justified by his religion.
– That Sikhs have cover for going about armed is largely irrelevant to most knife crime. Removing daggers from law-abiding Sikhs is not going to stop murderers from carrying knives.
– The lack of concern by the police for the victim is palpable. Derek Chauvin, however, had already called for the ambulance before he and his team had to restrain George Floyd. They continued to beg for the ambulance to arrive all the way through the incident.
– The resulting angry crowds are not burning down shops and looting. Sikh temples are not being attacked: their anger is directed – correctly – at the police.
– No-one in authority has taken the knee.
– The Pedant-General summarising the situation rather well.
To which I would add to anyone saying this horror should not be politicised: the incident is intrinsically political.
Why? Because the incident centres not just on the murder itself and murderer’s use of the word-of-power ‘racist‘, but also on the subsequent actions of the police, who responded to that word-of-power as the user intended them to.
So, this is all political because the police are the literal enforcers of the state’s will, responding as they have been trained to respond. This is a consequence of decades of establishment policy decisions by both Labour and ‘Conservative’ governments, a product of politically directed institutional police culture.
It has been said that one(!) police officer has resigned. He should be joined by the Chief Constable of Hampshire whose ‘leadership’ made these events possible.
Back to the PC who has resigned. Does resignation shield him/her from further disciplinary action? If his/her record is stainless thanks to a prompt resignation, can he/she apply to other police forces for employment?
Resigned? There should be charges brought against the individual and the Force itself.
Have always wondered-is it possible to sue the State in any way as official policy directly resulted in the death of an individual. Same for someone being attacked/killed etc by an illegal immigrant/repeat offender that is released back in the community-is there any recourse for legal action under any law e.g. Human Rights of the victim etc?
The incident (perhaps) showing that Political Correctness is not just someone having the vapours over language use but taken to extremes results in harm.
Maybe some institutions have been marched through, taken over, with minions expected to chant the Holy Writ?
Walking past the news stands at Asda this morning, the Mirror is reporting that Farage has been Booed in Parliament for “Exploiting teen’s death”, now we know who he really is proclaims the Mirror. Well now we know who the rest of them really are too don’t we?
Yes it is political – because the police “took the knee” over Mr Floyd, and because, even years before that, police training was all about how society is “structurally racist”, how racism is about “power relations” (so only white people can be racist) and how any claim of racism must be responded to as-true and must take priority over everything else.
Frankfurt School Critical Theory (“Woke”) Marxism as standard training and operating procedure – not just for the police, but for every institution in society.
As for pretending that more regulations against knives will deal with any of this – yes such a position is utterly dishonest.
QOTD! Blimey. I’ve been lurking here for 20 years…
Farage. 🙁 Don’t know what to think here.
Farage’s line and Parliament’s reaction will not sway anyone.
Reform supporters agree that, yes, rage is appropriate and the we have to see the race card being played from the bottom of the deck for what it is.
Standard MSM line-toers see him stoking riots.
What could he have said that would NOT have handed the MSM an open goal?
Yes it is good that Sikh leaders are siding with the victim – not the murderer.
To attack and kill an unarmed person is against Sikh religious law – regardless of what religion that person is.
To be fair to Islamic leaders – they react differently because Islamic law is different, they act in accord with their own religious law and in accord with the personal example of Muhammed.
Excellent resume.